


THE CHURCH AND 
INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS 











c 


American Section 
Report of Commission IV 
to 


THE UNIVERSAL CHRISTIAN CONFERENCE 
ON LIFE AND WORK 


HELD IN STOCKHOLM, SWEDEN 
August 19-30, 1925 





7th 


UNIVERSAL CHRISTIAN CONFERENCE 


Il. 


kN: 


Vi. 


ON LIFE AND WORK 


Commission Reports 


The Church’s Obligation in View of 
God’s Purpose for the World. 


The Church and Economic and Industrial 
Problems. 


The Church and Social and Moral Prob- 
lems. 


The Church and International Relations. 
The Church and Education. 


Methods of Co-operative and Federative 
Efforts By the Christian Communions. 


GENERAL PREFACE 


A few words should be written about the inception of The Universal 
Christian Conference on Life and Work. In the summer of 1919 the 
International Committee of the World Alliance for International Friend- 
ship Through the Churches met at The Hague. This was the first meet- 
ing of an international character held after the signing of the Armistice, 
if one excepts a small gathering of labor leaders. About sixty leaders of 
the Churches were present, representing nearly all the Protestant Com- 
munions and most of the countries of Europe. Ten or twelve delegates 
were present from America. 


The meetings at The Hague developed so sweet and reasonable an 
atmosphere, at a time when great bitterness prevailed everywhere, and 
the delegates present expressed themselves so strongly as: to the un- 
Christian character of war and the necessity of establishing a world order 
on a new and Christian basis, that several of the delegates felt strongly 
that the time had come for the Churches officially to get together and 
say what these Churchmen semi-officially were saying. As a result 
Archbishop Soederblom of Sweden, Dr. Charles S. Macfarland of 
America, the Dean of Canterbury, Dr. Henry A. Atkinson and others 
held an informal meeting to discuss the possibility of bringing the 
Churches of the world together for a Conference, where the Churches 
could utter their united conviction on international matters and all other 
matters with which society would have to deal in the reconstruction of 
civilization and the building of a new and better civilization on the 
ruins of the old, which lay all about them. 


This preliminary meeting was not altogether spontaneous for on two 
separate occasions during the progress of the war, Archbishop Soeder- 
blom had communicated with the Churches of Europe and America re- 
garding the possibility of such a conference and the Federal Council of 
Churches of Christ in America had suggested that a Conference of the 
Federated bodies of Churches in all the countries might meet together 
after the war. The unanimous opinion of the unofficial group at The 
Hague was that a committee should be appointed to bring the leaders of 
the Churches together with the aim of convincing them of the necessity 
of such a world gathering of the Churches ,and asking them to take the 
matter up with their respective denominations. This committee went 
from The Hague to Paris and brought together as many of the leaders 
of the Churches as possible upon such short notice. This meeting be- 
came greatly interested in the project and requested Dr. Frederick Lynch, 
Chairman of the Committee on Ecumenical Conference of the Federal 
Council of Churches of Christ in America to arrange for a preliminary 
neeting of the Churches the following summer. 

Dr. Lynch proceeded from Paris to London and had several inter- 
views with the Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr. F. B. Myers, Dr. Thomas 
Nightingale, Dr. J. H. Shakespeare and others. Meantime, Archbishop 
Soderbloom undertook to interest the Scandinavian Churches and Dr. Choisy 


III 


the Swiss Churches. Sufficient interest was aroused to warrant the calling 
of a preliminary Conference at Geneva in the summer of 1920. 


As a result of the procedures recorded above, one hundred delegates 
assembled at Geneva in August of 1920. A three days session was held 
and the Conference gradually began to assume shape. Great interest 
was manifested and all present expressed themselves to the effect that 
the Church Universal had a great opportunity to exert a determining 
influence upon the new order that must follow the war. Furthermore 
the world was waiting for some great pronouncement from the Churches 
upon such questions as war and peace, the industrial order; such im- 
mediate problems as those having to do with intemperance and vice 
and upon all ethical and moral questions. It was felt that a positive 
and commanding utterance of the Churches in these trying years would 
do much to encourage a disheartened world and would make it much 
easier for those who were trying to reconstruct the world on a Christian 
basis to carry on this high task. There was much confusion in the world 
as to just where the Church did stand on these great problems disturbing 
the minds of men. The conviction was expressed that only as the rule 
of life laid down by the gospels became the law of nations could any 
hope for security and peace be found or the great sores of the world be 
healed. 


Furthermore it was felt by all that whatever new international ma- 
chinery might be set up or whatever new industrial order might arise, 
it was only as these were permeated by the spirit of Jesus Christ that 
they would fulfill the high hopes of their founders. It was also strongly 
felt that two great blessings might ensue from such a Conference. On 
the one hand all individual communions would profit by this period of 
common intercourse, especially those communions that had greatly 
suffered from the war. They would be made strong in the conscious- 
ness of the oneness of all Christ’s disciples. On the other hand the 
coming together, if only for a month, of all the Churches of the world, 
to cooperate in the common task of redeeming the world order, and to 
make some great common pronouncement on the place of Christ in our 
civilization would be a great object lesson to the world. 


At Geneva a large International Committee was set up which was 
divided into four groups, one for America, one for the British Empire, 
one for the European Protestant churches and the fourth representing the 
Orthodox Eastern Church. The International Committee appointed a 
smaller Executive Committee, which held three meetings in successive 
years, one at Peterborough, England, one at Zurich, Switzerland and 
one at Amsterdam, Holland. In August, 1922, the International Com- 
mittee itself met at Helsingborg, Sweden, and was very fully attended 
by delegates from all the communions and nations. At this meeting 
the programme for the Conference assumed final shape. It was voted 
that the program for Stockholm should include the following groups 
of subjects: 


IV 


The Church’s Obligation in view of God’s purpose for the world. 

The Church and Economic and Industrial Problems. 

The Church and Social and Moral Problems. 

The Church and International Relations. 

The Church and Christian. Education. 

Methods of Co-operative and Federative Efforts by the Christian 
Communions. 


The reports which followed are in fulfillment of this vote taken at 
Helsingborg. In April, 1924, the full Committee met again at Birming- 
ham, England, in connection with C. O. P. E. C. and reviewed the 
progress made upon the reports and dealt specifically with plans for the 
Stockholm meeting. 


This is in brief the history of The Universal Christian Conference on 
Life and Work, and is the explanation of the reports which follow. 
These reports have been prepared with great care by the leaders of the 
Churches and by experts in the several questions discussed. They are 
submitted to the Conference in the hope that the Conference will receive 
them in the same spirit in which they have been written, ie. in the 
endeavor to find the common consciousness of the Churches upon these 
subjects and to voice its united feeling. 


AWN 


Digitized by the Internet Archive 


in 2021 with funding from 


Columbia University Libraries | 


R) 
tee 
7k: 


eee 


ah oe 


Tea 
ee ae 





LIST OF COMMISSION MEMBERS 


Joint-Chairmen 


THE RT. REV. CHARLES H. BRENT, D.D., LL.D. 
Bishop of Western New York, Vice-Chairman of Commission on International 
Justice and Goodwill of Federal Council of the Churches of Christ in America. 


} 


PRESIDENT W. H. P. FAUNCE, D.D., LL.D. 
President of Brown University. 


Secretaries 


REV. NEHEMIAH BOYNTON, D.D. 
Chairman of International Committee of World Alliance for International Friend- 


ship Through the Churches, 


REV. SIDNEY L. GULICK, D.D. 
Secretary of Commission on International Justice and Goodwill of Federal Council 
of the Churches of Christ in America. 


Z 


Members 


ALEXANDER, MOST REV. ARCHBISHOP 
Russian Orthodox Church. 


ALLEN, REV. WILLIAM C. 
Member of Philadelphia Yearly Meeting of Friends and of College Park Association 


in California. 


CHAMBERLAIN, REV. WILLIAM I., Ph.D. 
Foreign Secretary of Board of Foreign Missions of Reformed Church in America. 


CHAPPELL, REV. EDWIN B., D.D. 
Sunday School Editor of Methodist Episcopal Church, South. 


CLARK, REV. FRANCIS E., D.D., LL.D. 
President of United Society of Christian Endeavor. 


FINLEY, JOHN H., LL.D. 
Editor of New York Times. 


HOLT, HAMILTON, LL.D., 
Executive Director of Woodrow Wilson Foundation. 


LYNCH, REV. FREDERICK, D.D. 
Educational Secretary of The Church Peace Union and the World Alliance for 
International Friendship Through the Churches. 


McDONALD, JAMES G. 
Chairman of Executive Committee of Foreign Policy Association. 


MERRILL, REV. WILLIAM PIERSON, D.D. 
Chairman of The Church Peace Union. Chairman of the American Council of the 
World Alliance for International Friendship Through the Churches. 


PARSONS, RT. REV. EDWARD LAMBE, D.D. 
Bishop co-adjutor of California. 


PLIMPTON, GEORGE A., LL.D. 
Publisher. Treasurer of The Church Peace Union, and of World Alliance for 
International Friendship Through the Churches. 


RUSSELL, PROFESSOR ELBERT, Ph.D. 
Director of Woolman School. 


SMITH, BOLTON 
Business man and author. 


WINCHESTER, RT. REV. JAMES RIDOUT, D.D. 
Bishop co-adjutor of Arkansas. 


VII 





” 5 
ee oy 
ee. a 
tee) 

i 
“ 











vor at Be 





* 


bs 


$45 
ba. 





< 





TABLE OF CONTENTS 


Foreword: General character of the problem and the task. 


1. 


2. Two Conceptions of Religion 


3. Their Bearing on the Problems of War and Peace 


4. Awakening Consciousness in the Churches 


5. Other Agencies 


6. The Churches and the League of Nations 


Lk: 


A Strange Paradox 


Relations of Church and State 


Part I. 


First Peace Society in U. S. in 1815. The “Peace Movement” in 


the U. S. sprang from the Church, but the churches as such had 
no part in it. 


Situation needs explanation. 


First—Individualistic and Eschatological. 
Second—Religion recognized in 19th Century as concerned also 


with this world and with social, international and inter-racial 
relations. 


Old conception meant indifference to questions of war and peace. 


New social emphasis brings sense of responsibility and demand 
for a Christian world-order. 


sew ecee te cence ccsescecesencccsseccecosse 


Abolition of war recognized as one of aims of Church at the 
founding of Federal Council, 1905. 


Commission on International Justice and Goodwill. 
Denominational resolutions against War. 


Church Peace Union founded by Andrew Carnegie in 1914. 
World Alliance for International Friendship. 


Promotion of friendly relations with Far East, Mexico, Latin 
America. 


City and State Federations of Churches beginning to take in- 
terest in international relations. 


Part II. 


wen nnn ew nen te ene ne ee eens ee se en eneneeseesnennennesanseneens 


In the United States the State and the Church are completely 
separate. Christians must obey the State in secular matters. 
But within limits of law and order churches and individuals 
are free to believe what they chose and live the life that they 
prefer, Churches may exert influence upon State. 


In the abolition of war, State alone is impotent, for it is at bot- 
tom a moral question. Church has a vital part to play. 


Question arises, is citizen subject to State in matters of morals, 
i.e., on such a matter as war? 


IX 


we 


1. 


1. 


1. 


Part III. 


Fundamental Factors. What are the real causes Of WAlS foe 


1) Modern civilization makes all nations economically inter- 
dependent. 

2) Still each is independent politically. 

3) Growth of populations and the matter of food supply to 
be noted also. 

4) Secret diplomacy and secret treaties complicate the 
situation. 

5) Existence of nations and governments natural, inevitable. 

6) Ignorance of nations one of another an essential factor. 

7) Biased views of history taught in the schools of every 
country. 

8) Capitalistic organization of modern society needs study. 

9) Spirit of greed and selfishness contributes. 

10) Faulty profit distribution of modern industry to be noted. 

11) Partisan politics in many lands also to blame. 

12) Five additional factors. 


Part IV. 


A Stupendous Undertaking. Few as yet appreciate the size of the 
task of making a warless WoOrld......-.---.-------:---ss-csccsseeecerere terete 


In each nation there should be a “Church Staff for Peace.” 
Emotional demand for abolition of war almost universal. No. 
nation wants war. Every nation wants rights. Must deal then 
with collisions of interest producing war. No few interested 
individuals or statesmen can do it. Thought of warless world 
must become a driving passion. 

-This means: 


(a) An Engineering Task. To distribute accurate informa- 
tions and organize international machinery. 

(b) An Educational Task. To teach A.B.C. of international 
co-operation. 

(c) A Co-operative Task. To devise ways of co-operation in 
trade, distribution of raw materials and maintenance of 
justice. 

(d) A Religious Task. Conceptions of duty and religion 
must be enlarged to include international and inter-racial 
rights and duties. 

This last task is the distinctive duty of the churches in 
a crusade for universal peace. 


Part V. ‘ 


Distinctive Function of the Churches. ......2...----------:::--sces-eeceeseecnnenceennennes 


Pastors cannot take the place of statesmen in dealing with 

governments. Duty of pastor and preacher is: 

To cultivate the spirit of fair play; not in the abstract. 

To teach that Golden Rule must hold in international life. 

To show that war system violates God’s purposes for the 

international family. 

To show true picture of war in the field of battle. 

To lead Church members to oppose government action not 
in accord with Christian principles. 

To inspire citizens to express their convictions regarding war 

issues. 

To teach churches and leaflets to work together. 

Churches must develop trained men for this task. 


Xx 


Page 
8 


11 


15 


OE SE Sg TE SI ee ea tas de LE LE 16 


1. The ideal of the Kingdom of God is universal. It includes every 
relation of human life. 


2. The achievement of a Christian world-order rests primarily on 
the churches of the nations. 


3. Individual Christians by the million should face their individual 
responsibilities as Christians. 


4. Christian leaders should cultivate in each nation the spirit of for- 
giveness and reconciliation. 


5. Christian nations should develop the right spirit and attitude 
toward the peoples of Asia and Africa. 


6. The churches should assert their loyalty to Christ as superior 
to every human loyalty. 


7. Never again should the churches yield their sacred influence in 
the support of wars dominated by secret policies and pagan prin- 
ciples and objectives. 


8. The central and final problem is the problem of Christian leadership 


Se nate gat cnutteisawe taal pe aie See dlp Ao Reaae tle lll aap Sails foe le XIII 


tes 





- a 7 a. Oe ol a en ee * Se ae 
» J a 
’ 145 f ‘ 
: ‘ ro : 
= : ae 
, ' Sia “+ . 
, is a 7 
: ; . 
9 
} as * 
: : ie, bod Oar 
aes. - ond - 
cn 
j : weg : 
See ee seg't esac 
% = 4 . 5 < 
ae y ee ines : Po en 
okt “SLRS eva ae leh. STU A eae) 
d a 
5 hea} . \ 
. * m Lan. 2 qa a 
eis rh ee? 
<< 2e-8 Coe peri? vane 















a a ayy § mate TES rt Owe, ies ae ey Sete biden eb eek 
; es eee nets pea 


iat a ary 





. 
. re 4 
* enh | a: rie 
‘ante st sg ‘ary pee 4 ‘ H 
8 2 4< trie “<4 
Me Sas  -> io . 
$ a Oe r 
< * . La ’ 
Pee pee Be B 5 OR 
x4 ae . > vee 
ae st pang ty aS be ogka meas aye fey ee ree ea can eee Hines) wo ra eee anne ta a 
- ry z ; Paey ! oie coe 
r vy rye 
= : iq h 
ve tad at) 3 ‘ 
Xe 
4 ’ 
: 
A . ‘ 
> 
’ 
Lae 
3 
7 
( 
. 
fy 
. , 
‘ 
7 7 
. * 
‘ 
. r 
¢ = 
. O 5 
. 
+ 
= aint - 
a 3 « * 
> 
\ ‘ 
U ag - 
4 ff Poe | Lal ‘ 





THE CHURCH AND INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS 


FOREWORD 


A Christian world-order must somehow be substituted for the pagan 
war-system of the nations. In the settlement of international disputes, 
some way must be found by which to have law and reason take the 
place of war. 

This is the most stupendous and the most urgent task facing the 
modern world. The race is on between international education and the 
mutual destruction of the nations. 

Man’s mastery of Nature’s titantic forces has far out-run his moral 
development. Moral fitness of millions of men to use these mighty 
forces, as individuals and as nations, must be promptly developed; 
otherwise our modern achievements in civilization will bring down upon 
us overwhelming disasters and age-long chaos. 

The task is one that rests uniquely on the churches, for it is a moral 
task. How are the churches of the United States facing this task? 
Are they grappling with it vigorously and hopefully? What more 
should they. be doing? And how? 

These are the matters to be considered in this paper. 


PART I 
A Strange Paradox 


The first peace society in the United States was organized in 1815. 
That was the beginning of a long succession of peace organizations, 
movements and leaders, an adequate account of which would require 
volumes. But, strange to say, the organized churches, as such, except 
for the Quakers (who, from their very first arrival in America have 
made remarkable and invaluable contributions to the cause of world 
peace) have had little interest and practically no part in the movement. 
Yet the vital breath of this movement came from the churches. 
Throughout the century, as indeed throughout the centuries since 
Christ, the Hebrew prophets and the New Testament have been the 
unfailing sources of inspiration and ideals. The leaders have been 
reared in the churches and trained in the Bible. But they have sought 
their ends through voluntary, non-church organizations. Until recent 
years, church members have not been taught that as Christians they 
have responsibility in the movement to abolish war. 

This paradox needs explanation, for the antithesis of the Kingdom 
of God and the war-system of the nations is obvious. The position 
in which the churches of the whole world now find themselves is both 
anomalous and ominous. They are facing the most appalling problem 
and menace of present day civilization, yet they are apparently uncon- 
cerned. In their official conferences and assemblies ecclesiastical 
affairs claim their chief interest. Colossal preparation for “ inevitable” 


ba Seg fad 


war threatens the world with bankruptcy and chaos; yet the churches 
seem ignorant of the issues and unconscious of their danger. Though 
possessing incalculable power, they are undisturbed by the challenge 
of Mars, and ignore their wonderful opportunity. How is this to be 
explained? 


Two Conceptions of Religion 


Throughout the Eighteenth Century and well on toward the close of 
the Nineteenth the vast majority of pastors and church members re- 
garded religion as dealing with the welfare of men in the next world. 
The primary purpose of religion and of the Church was conceived to be 
that of providing salvation from eternal suffering in hell and assur- 
ance of permanent bliss in Heaven. 


Religion was conceived eschatologically and_individualistically. 
“What must I do to be saved?” was the dominant question. And the 
customary answer was: “Be baptized, join the church, believe the 
creeds, obey the ten commandments.” The primary concern of religion 
was correct beliefs about and correct emotional attitudes toward God 
and Christ and the future life, correct relations with the church, correct 
rituals and ceremonials and a correct personal life in order to escape 
hell and secure entrance to heaven. a 

Literal acceptance of the Bible and especially of the apocalyptic 
passages of the New Testament was also stressed. The world, it was 
held, is to grow worse and worse until overwhelmed in destruction. 
Christ will then come in full power to create a new Heaven and a 
new earth. In this transformation and redemption of the world, the 
individual has no part or responsibility. It is all the work of God and 
His Christ, Christians have but to wait in patience and fidelity till 
He comes. They are in the “world” but not a part of it. 


The Second Conception of Religion 


Beginning, however, with the middle of the Nineteenth Century, a 
change began to take place in the conception of religion and the 
church, and in the interpretation of Christianity. Emphasis began to 
be placed on religion as having to do also with this world. The social 
value of religion began to be recognized. Study of the life and teachings 
of Jesus led many to feel that the real spirit and the real emphasis of 
His teachings are social and ethical, rather than metaphysical; that the 
meaning of the Sermon on the Mount, the significance of the parables 
and the whole drift of His life show that His conception of religion was 
deeply concerned with this world; that in His thought, God’s judgment 
of men is concerned with their spirit of goodwill and brotherly 
helpfulness to each other; and that the real aim of Jesus was to estab- 
lish a brotherhood which should transform society and beget a King- 
~ dom of God on Earth as in Heaven. 
Since the beginning of the present century these ideas have found 


alc 


rapidly growing acceptance. The Christian religion, it is now increas- 
ingly held, seeks to know and practice God’s will for this life. That 
will was revealed in Christ, and the reality of our salvation, both here 
and hereafter, consists in incarnating in our lives the spirit and ideals 
of Jesus. The church is becoming interested in effective processes 
_ for regenerating the spirit and reforming the minds of men, infusing 
them with the spirit and the mind of Jesus. It seeks to save men and 
women from debased personal character and debasing social, industrial 
and economic conditions. It is concerned also with the whole life of 
man—social, international and inter-racial. In a word, the Christian 
religion is increasingly conceived as the way of life and the kind of 
spirit taught and lived by Jesus. 


Both these conceptions of religion and salvation are now prevalent 
among the Protestant churches of the United States. Many clearly 
distinguish between them, accepting one and rejecting the other. But 
the vast majority of Protestant Christians apparently hold both views 
in more or less mixture and confusion. 


Their Bearing on the Problems of War and Peace 


The bearing of the differing conceptions of religion on the attitude 
of Christians, and especially of the organized churches, toward the 
problems of war and peace is clear. In proportion as the individualistic, 
eschatological view is strongly held, church members take little interest 
in these matters and feel slight responsibility for abolishing war. In 
proportion as men believe that God’s Kingdom is to come in this world 
by the service of those who practice the Christian way of life, interest 
and activity in the program develop. 

The popular acceptance of the second view of religion was remark- 
ably manifested at the beginning of the world war. Fierce condemna- 
tions were hurled at the Church because it had not prevented the great 
war. That war, it was assumed, could not have occurred had the Church 
done its duty. And this assumed in turn that the Church should teach 
and act on matters pertaining to this world; and that Christian salva- 
tion is not exclusively for individuals but also for society and for entire 
nations. 


Awakening Consciousness in the Churches 


The American churches love peace and hate war, but by reason 
of the fact that America is so far removed from Europe and its con- 
flicts, there has developed only recently the strong consciousness on 
the part of the churches and religious leaders that war and the war 
system must be destroyed or Christianity will fail. The Quakers have 
throughout all their history put major emphasis upon this idea. It is 
interesting to note, however, that when the Federal Council of the 
Churches of Christ in America was organized, the second conception 
of religion was sufficiently accepted to lead the Council, at its prelimi- 


4 


nary meeting in 1905, to the affirmation that among the objects of 
the Council was the abolition of war. A clarion call to the churches 
and a strong declaration on international relations was issued. Early 
in its history (1911) the Federal Council established the Commission 
on Peace and Arbitration, which was later renamed the Commission 
on International Justice and Goodwill. 

Throughout the entire period of its activity, the Federal Council has 
issued to the churches, year after year, ringing messages for the enlarge- 
ment of vision, for definiteness ‘of action, and for deeds of mercy and 
goodwill. It has outlined important programs for international organi- 
zation and cooperation and advocated the fundamental principles of a 
world guided by organized goodwill. It has published study courses 
for ‘use-in the churches. It has discussed concrete questions. It has 
sought by moral pressure to influence the policies of the Government 
on a number of occasions, of which perhaps the most notable was the 
Washington Conference on the Limitation of Armament. Even a par- 
tial record of its activities and utterances during the fifteen years of 
its existence would fill many volumes. 

During these years, moreover, practically all of the annual gatherings 
of the larger denominations have passed resolutions dealing with ques- 
tions of war and peace. They have begun to show some consciousness 
of their responsibility in the program for abolishing war. A vigorous 
demand for still more effective effort is arising on many sides. The 
problem is increasingly recognized as essentially moral. 


Other Agencies 


Early in 1914 this awakening consciousness found expression in the 
establishment of The Church Peace Union, a “Foundation” with a capi- 
tal fund of $2,000,000,—entrusted to a body of Trustees. This project 
had been proposed to Mr. Andrew Carnegie by leaders of the churches 
and peace movements in Great Britain and America. The income of 
the fund has been used. for the promotion of educational activities 
among the churches of many countries, for assistance to local peace 
organizations of churches and for the cultivation of personal acquaint- 
ance and cooperation between individual Christian leaders of many 
lands. 

The World Alliance for International Friendship through the 
churches, one of the principal products of The Church Peace Union, 
is continually bringing together groups of churchmen all over the 
United States to consider the establishment of an international order 
on the Christian principles. It has also held several great national 
conventions where it has dealt with the World Court and other allied 
topics. It publishes a monthly bulletin which is sent to its entire 
membership embracing several thousand pastors. During the past five 
years the Alliance has brought together leaders in the churches of all 
communions and practically all countries of Europe and North America 
for a yearly conference on what the churches may do to promote inter- 


icin 2a 


national goodwill. Such a conference was held at Copenhagen and 
was attended by some two hundred and fifty delegates, representing 
practically all Protestant communions as well as the Eastern Orthodox 
churches. 

But more significant than organizational activities and contacts are 
those long sustained expressions of international goodwill that have 
been called forth amtong the churches of America by pitiful appeals for 
mercy and relief during and since the great war. These appeals have 
come from Belgium, the Near East, China, Russia, Austria, Japan, 
Germany. The value of the food, clothing, medicines and funds dis- 
tributed by Americans in these countries during the past decade has 
been estimated at about a billion dollars. 

For the promotion of better relations between the United States and 
the Far East, the Federal Council of the Churches of Christ in America 
has, for more than a decade, maintained, with the assistance of The 
Church Peace Union, a Commission on Relations with the Orient. It 
has rendered a significant service in seeking to promote mutual under- 
standing, interpreting to Americans the problems of China, Korea and 
Japan and to those countries the problems and the situation in the 
United States. The task of reconciling the white and the yellow races 
is seen to be one of the urgently important and also one of the exceed- 
ingly difficult problems of the century. 

Relations also with Mexico and Latin America are receiving Serious 
attention from appropriate committees of the Federal Council. It is 
felt that in these concrete situations the churches should inform them- 
selves of the facts, and particularly of the facts making for irritation 
and ill will, and should undertake procedures fitted to produce mutual 
understanding and good will. 

In about fifty cities of the United States, Church Councils or Federa- 
tions exist, many of which have established their own local Committees 
on International Goodwill. 


The Churches and the League of Nations 


“The Parliament of Man, the Federation of the World,” has for 
many decades been an ideal cherished and widely proclaimed by church 
leaders in the United States. During the Great War it was commonly 
expected that peace would bring an actual organization of the nations, 
making real and effective international law, with Courts and Commis- 
sions for the judicial and arbitral settlement of every threatening inter- 
national dispute. 

At the meeting of the Executive Committee of the Federal Council 
of the Churches of Christ in America, in December. 1918, a Memorial 
to “The Peace Conference of the Allied and Associated Nations at Paris” 
was unanimously adopted. It urged the immediate formation of a 
“League of Nations.” Among the paragraphs of that trenchant Me- 
morial are the assertions that “We must have a governed world in 
which the security and rights of each shall rest upon the combined 


622 


strength of all. Humanity must be organized on a basis of justice and 
fair dealing. The law of brotherhood must supersede the law of the 
jungle.” ... The League “must be democratic in spirit and in form. 
It must be capable of continuous adjustment to the ‘advancing life of 
separate nations and also of the world. It must be directed by the 
enlightened conscience of mankind.” ... Such a League will be “an 
internation! manifestation of the Kingdom of God.” 

This Memorial was conveyed to the Paris Peace Council by a special 
Commission from the Federal Council and may have been one of the 
influences that led to the organization of the League of Nations estab- 
lished by the Treaty of Versailles. 

During the spring and summer of 1919, and especially during the 
Presidential campaign of 1920, the question of ratifying that treaty 
became a bitter political issue, upon which the political parties became 
hopelessly divided. It has not, therefore, seemed advisable for the 
Federal Council of the Churches to issue any statements for or against 
the League of Nations and American membership therein. This, how- 
ever, does not signify the abandonment by the churches of their ideal 
of world cooperation in the establishment of justice, righteousness, 
security and peace for all alike. It only means that many within the 
churches have felt that certain injustices and wrongs were embodied in 
the Treaty of Versailles, which the League was to enforce, and that 
these injustices and wrongs, with other limitations and defects, made 
it impossible for them to see in the League a step toward the realiza- 
tion of their Christian ideals of the Kingdom of God for the interna- 
tional life of the world. 

The establishment by the Nations, through the initiative of the 
League, of the Permanent Court of International Justice, whose func- 
tions are purely judicial and in the interest of equal justice for all, has 
received the practically unanimous support of the churches of the 
United States. They have expressed themselves with no uncertain 
voice in their remarkable Memorial to the Senate, (April, 1924), ap- 
pealing for American adherence to that Court. 


The Geneva Protocol on Compulsory Arbitration, Security and Dis- 
armament has come before the country so recently that the churches 
have not yet had time to study it and decide their attitude toward its 
multitudinous provisions. They will, no doubt, approve unanimously 
its general principles for the complete outlawry of war, condemning as 
criminal an aggressor nation, and for the pacific settlement of every 
threatening international dispute. The point of doubt lies in the pro- 
visions for economic and military sanctions. 


In general it may be said that the growing emphasis of the League 
on equal justice and security for all, and on ways for their achievement, 
together with diminishing»emphasis on the work of the League for the 
primary benefit of the great Powers, is commending it to a steadily 
growing constituency in the United States. When it becomes clear 
to the vast majority in the churches that the League exists solely for 


~ 


78 


the promotion of justice, righteousness and peace for all, and cannot 
be utilized for special privilege by any, their demand for American 
membership in the League will be strong and insistent, 


PART II 


Relations of Church and State 


In the program on a warless world the question necessarily arises 
regarding the respective responsibilities of the Church and the State. 
What are their proper relations to each other? 

In the United States the respective organisms and functions of the 
State and the Church are ordinarily thought to be completely separate. 
A free Church in a free State is the accepted ideal. According to this 
view, the sacred and the secular are sharply distinguished. The Church 
has jurisdiction in the sacred matters of religion, while secular matters 
belong to the State. Christians must obey the State in secular matters, 
on the principle of rendering to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s; but 
in matters of religion the Church is supreme. The State should not 
interfere with the Church in its affairs, and neither should the Church 
interfere with the State in its affairs. The respective realms of control 
and jurisdiction are sharply separated. 

Every individual is of necessity a member of the State and has inescap- 
able and coercible obligations. He must obey the laws and support 
the Government. Membership, however, in the Church is voluntary. 
An individual is free to join and also free to withdraw at any time. 

Both the State and the Church are regarded as legitimate and neces- 
cary institutions, each rendering an essential service to the welfare of 
the individual, of the community and of the nation. 

Within the limits of law and order, churches and individuals of all 
religions are free to believe what they choose and free to live the kind 
of life they prefer. In this sense religion is an individual affair. Neither 
the State nor the Church may seek by force to coerce individual re- 
ligious beliefs. 

But, as already indicated, a rising tide of conviction is spreading over 
the nation, and especially among the churches, that the religion of Jesus 
requires a life of universal goodwill and brotherliness; that those who 
profess to be Christian should seek to banish evils of all kinds from the 
world; and that this can be done only by securing the acceptance of 
new ideals and a new spirit by the governments of the nations. 

In this sense, the churches of America are beginning to seek to influ- 
ence the policies of the State. The adoption of “Prohibition” is one 
manifestation of this conviction. 

It is also becoming clear that in the achievement of a warless world 
the State alone is impotent. The assumptions widely held that religious 
and moral considerations are quite outside the purview of the State; 
that the State is an institution of power; that it is absolutely sov- 


i as 


ereign; that it is under no obligation to a higher authority; and that 
the true aim and purpose of a State is to grow more and more pow- 
erful, we begin to recognize, constitute a menace to the world and 
even to the State in which these conceptions are held. The falsity of 
these assumptions must be asserted and taught. Behind and under- 
neath the activities of the State, we began to see, there is need for 
effective moral education and leadership, cultivating among the people 
the ideals and motives of true international life upon which permanent 
peace can alone be based. 


On the other hand, since the actual relations of nations are deter- 
mined by their governments, the abolition of war can be achieved 
only by the appropriate agreements, activities and cooperation of states. 
Moral principles must control the activities of states if good will, 
mutual consideration and helpfulness are to prevail. Here then the 
realms of religion and politics intertwine. 

We are learning that in this, and in many other matters as well, the 
sharp distinction between the secular and the religious, the political and 
the ethical cannot be maintained. This insight is forcing rapidly to 
the front questions regarding appropriate ways by which the Church 
can secure from the State the adoption of policies and practices that 
are ethical. On the answer of these questions hangs the fate of the 
world. For the wages of sin is death for nations as well as for indi- 
viduals. A world of non-moral states is doomed. 


And this raises the question whether a citizen is subject to the State 
in matters of morals. Can citizens who believe that war and prepara- 
tions for war are violations of God’s universal moral law be loyal 
to the State? Can a Christian be a loyal citizen of a non-moral State? 
Can a Christian in obedience to a cammand from the State rightly 
commit acts which would be wrong for him as an individual—theft, 
deception, anger, revenge, murder? Which possesses superior author- 
ity? How can the Church make the State Christian? Is the attitude 
of the “conscientious objector” right regarding the use of force by the 
State in achieving even the legitimate ends of security, liberty, justice 
and honor in international relations? 


‘These are questions which demand earnest study. They involve 
profound issues in the mutual relations of Church and State. Mani- 
festly their discussion is beyond the scope of this brief paper. 


PART III 
Fundamental Factors 


Before asking ourselves how the churches of the world can render 
the service demanded of them in the abolition of war, brief considera- 
tion must be given to the real causes of war. The answer is not so 
simple as many suppose. Many factors are involved—economic, politi-. 
cal, psychological. The following elements can be distinguished : 


eee 


1) Modern civilization has made all the nations of the world extra- 
ordinarily interdependent. They are interdependent for raw materials. 
No nation is completely supplied from within its own territories with 
all the varieties of mineral and vegetable products absolutely essential 
for its manifold industrial activities. Each must secure something from 
without. They are also interdependent for markets. Purchases by 
one people furnish no small part of the prosperity of another people. 
And they are interdependent for food. No country supplies all the 
varieties and quantities of food demanded by its people. Each nation 
secures from others, and also contributes to others. 


2) Notwithstanding their vital interdependence, each is absolutely 
independent politically. Each is a law unto itself. Each naturally 
seeks to extend its control of the vital necessities of its people. Each 
desires to be, just so far as possible, independent economically and 
industrially. Political independence is felt, indeed, to be menaced by 
economic dependence. This it is that has caused the rivalry during 
recent decades of the peoples of Europe for colonial possessions in 
Africa and for preferential trade rights and preferential access to raw 
materials and markets in China. 


3) The growth of population in all civilized nations is another 
factor of immense significance. Victories of medical science have mar- 
velously reduced the death rate and extended the span of life. The 
birth rate has not fallen correspondingly. When these vital changes 
affect all peoples, the problems of food production will grow increas- 
ingly serious. The amount of land on which food can be raised is 
strictly limited. The present food supply of the world can undoubtedly 
be much increased: But the time is not far ahead when the world’s 
population will overtake its food supply. What effect will that have 
on the problem of war? » 


4) Secret diplomacy and secret treaties constitute another factor 
in the situation. © Secrecy has been the habit of governments from 
ancient times. By these means, balances of power between groups of 
states have been created. Each state seeks its own economic or other 
advantage with the aid of the other states of the group, but it has no 
control of the policies and procedures of those states. The peoples 
moreover have been quite ignorant of the real facts and the mutual 
agreements and have been committed to programs that in the end 
inevitably involved war. 

5) The existence of nations and of governments, however, is natural 
and indeed inevitable. States have come into being to meet certain 
fundamental needs of great groups of people living a common life. 
Not without sound reason have governments throughout the centuries 
claimed divine origin and divine authority. They exist to maintain 
order, justice and peace between the individuals, communities and 
classes of their own people.. Intertribal developed into international 
relations. Each government naturally undertook to provide national 
security and liberty for its own people; to prevent oppression and ex- 


ment om 


ploitation by other nations; to maintain right and justice for its citi- 
zens in dealing with citizens of other lands; and to defend the honor 
and fair name of its people. These activities and objectives of govern- 
ment are natural, necessary and wholly legitimate. Yet these very 
activities have important bearings on the problem of war. 


6) Ignorance of each other by enormous aggregations of men is still 
another important factor in the problem. Speaking different languages; 
controlled by different moral, religious and cultural practices; and con- 
scious each of its own history, achievements, needs and interests, each 
group is apt to regard other groups as strangers and foreigners. The 
rights of others receive scant consideration. Each group ignores the 
Golden Rule. Wrongs produce wrath. Centuries of conflict have 
created deep-seated enmities, suspicions and more or less latent de- 
sires for revenge. A vicious circle of wrong spirit and mutual wrong- 
doings alienates all the peoples and races of men, 


7) In the past, the systematic education provided in all primary 
and secondary schools has commonly given a biased view of the history 
and character of other peoples and races, thereby creating national 
bigotry, race prejudice and an attitude of mind susceptible to the war 
appeal; while the persistent glorification of war and war heroes in 
literature and text-books has perpetuated the idea that war is the 
field of supreme opportunity for ambitious youth. Even in the sphere 
of religion, there has often been a narrow nationalism, intensified by 
a type of teaching in which God has been presented as a tribal or 
national deity—rather than as the God and Father of all mankind. 


8) The capitalistic organization of modern society as a cause of 
war needs special study. Many maintain that it is the principal cause 
today and that the war system will continue until private capital is 
destroyed. Great aggregations of private wealth seek investment in 
foreign lands. Capitalists have intimate relations with, if not virtual 
control of, governments. The resources of governments—diplomacy, 
army and navy—are utilized by big business to get opportunity and 
security for their foreign investments. Capital, moreover, in enor- 
mous munition plants, unconsciously produces and sometimes, it is 
asserted, even deliberately cultivates suspicion and fear between nations. 
For, in proportion as nations fear each other, they arm, and in pro- 
portion as nations arm, munition interests prosper. 

9) The spirit of greed and selfishness, moreover, and the schemes 
of adventurous and unscrupulous traders in foreign lands to get all that 
is possible for as little as possible, are common characteristics of many 
who go from one group to another. The natural predatory tendencies 
of men and the spirit of exploitation by the shrewd and powerful of 
those that are ignorant, backward, and weak find abundant opportunity 
in the contacts of mutually alien races and strange peoples. These 
selfish transactions, wrongs and injustices lead to bitterness, resent- 
ment, animosity. 


noes y ee 


10) ‘The very nature of our modern industrial system and its faulty 
method of distributing profits is also regarded by many as making war 
inevitable. This system, through its increasing utilization of scientific 
knowledge and natural power, can produce, with ever diminishing num- 
bers of human workers, more than the local market can consume. This 
forces the dread alternatives of increasing unemployment or expanding 
foreign markets. To maintain employment, markets must therefore be 
secured by diplomacy and protected by naval and military forces. 
Economic militaristic imperialism, it is contended, is an inevitable by- 
product of our modern scientific-industrial-financial system. Vast world 
wars between nationalistic economic rivals appear to be inevitable so 
long as the present system is maintained. 

11) Partisan politics in many lands seem also to play a particularly 
pernicious part in producing the war spirit and ultimately war. The 
party out of power charges the party in power with a “weak foreign 
policy.” The spirit of narrow nationalism and jingoistic patriotism is 
cultivated and appealed to as a means by which to overthrow the dom- 
inant party and take its place. In the contests of political parties, the 
objective facts and the international consequences of their discussion 
are of little concern to the debaters. Each distorts the situation in order 
to put the other party in false positions and drive it out of power. Per- 
haps no more sinister and difficult element in the whole situation exists 
than the fierce and unscrupulous conflicts of party politics within each 
of the major nations. 

12) Among other important factors in the situation we can barely 
refer to only five. Modern conditions of general education and com- 
munications have made possible as never before (1) a selfish, self- 
conscious, self-assertive nationalism and (2) a vast horde of imperfectly 
educated and irresponsible writers, who appeal to the worst nationalis- 
tic elements in each nation. Hence comes (3) the poisoned jingo 
press, which is at the same time too largely dominated (4) by great 
and self-seeking economic interests. In each land, moreover, are (5) 
thousands of retired officers of armies and navies, whose training 
makes them practically incapable of thinking on international rela- 
tions save in terms of suspicion, ill-will and force. Their fervid 
patriotism leads them to oppose as disloyal and dangerous all plans 
for universal peace based on mutual confidence, goodwill, justice, law 
‘and order, in which ideals they too often have little or no faith. Their 
inevitable influence promotes public opinion in support of militarism 
and the force-philosophy of the State. 


PART IV 
A Supendous Undertaking 
In the light of these various factors of the modern world, it is mani- 
fest that the achievement of a warless world is a task so intricate 
and so stupendous that few as yet appreciate how difficult and stu- 
pendous it is. 


SS Ye Sosa 


The various factors of modern civilization tending to produce war 
need the most careful study by church leaders and then by the rank 
and file of church members. Programs should be laid out for both 
knowing and dealing with the dangers. There is call for skilfull strategy 
in the crusade for peace. In each nation there might well be a “General 
Staff” of the Churches for Peace, composed of men of conspicuous abil- 
ity, insight and knowledge. ‘They should be trained specialists, giving 
their entire time to the single task of education and guiding the people 
of right mind and good will into those cooperative movements by 
which to overcome the “causes of war.” 


The emotional demand for the abolition of war is well-nigh uni- 
versal. But an understanding of the real problems involved, and the 
willingness to pay the necessary price for achievement are still gen- 
erally absent from the people. 


No nation, indeed, wants war. But every nation wants its rights. 
It wants liberty and security. It wants respectful and honorable treat 
ment. It wants the opportunity to enlarge its resources and its markets 
and to increase its prosperity. These objectives and these convictions 
tend to bring growing and vigorous nations into rivalry and conflict. 

Fundamental, therefore, to the achievement of a warless world is 
the task of reconciling the nations. They must learn to see the real 
world of their neighbors, to understand and sympathize with their 
problems and needs. They must learn, also, to see their own national 
defects and wrong-doings in their international relations. They must 
develop mutual confidence. They must devise methods for solving in a 
fair and even-handed way the inevitable clashes of national desire and 
policy, before insoluble situations arise whose only résult is war. 


To see where real right and real justice lie is not always easy. Indeed 
it is highly difficult. In most disputes each party has some truth and 
some right on its side. If, therefore, war is to be banished from the 
modern world, the competing and clashing wants and needs and rights 
of vast self-conscious groups of men must somehow be reconciled. 

To insure the ending of war we must deal with the collisions of 
interest which produce war; we must recognize in advance the causes 
of trouble and remove them while they are yet in germ. War cannot 
be stopped when it is about to break, when angry passions have gripped 
the nations. The time to act is years before, by changes in policy, by 
friendly conferences and mutually helpful agreements. When danger 
of war actually looms up it is usually too late. 


A warless world, moreover, cannot be achieved by a smbll number 
of enthusiastic idealists and clever statesmen in a few of the nations. 
The reason why the “peace movement” has not thus far accomplished 
more than it has, is because the number of those who have taken serious 
interest in it has been so small. War will be banished from the world 
when millions of individuals participate in the movement. Men and 
women of every type and class, from laborers to statesmen, must share 


5935 


in sane programs, develop the right spirit, understand the problems and 
cooperate in creating correct international public opinion. 


The thought of a warless world must somehow be transformed 
form a beautiful idea into a driving passion. Mere intellectual consid- 
erations will never end war. A crusading spirit must take possession 
of scores of thousands of devoted and determined men and women in 
each land, who will inspire and lead the millions. 


An Engineering Task 


Yet mere emotional demand for the abolition of war, mere denuncia- 
tion of war as folly, as futile, or even as sin; mere description of the 
glory and prosperity of a world in lasting peace, will not achieve the 
end. The task is a vast problem in human engineering. Condemna- 
tion never stopped the raging floods of the Mississippi from overflowing 
into adjacent lowlands. That was a task for engineers. So, too, is the 
task of ending wars an engineering task. Only it is vastly larger and 
more difficult. It requires the construction of much international ma- 
chinery, for the distribution of impartial and adequate information, for 
developing the right spirit, for the creation of real international law, 
for maintaining the security of each by the united power of all, and for 
the actual peaceful settlement of international disputes. 


An aneatonal Task 


The abolition of war is a great educational undertaking. Millions of 
men in many lands must be taught to know history as it has actually 
been. The peoples must get the sober facts—deflating national pride 
and exaggerated egoism, creating respect for neighbors, and showing 
that all humanity is-indissolubly bound together in a common destiny 
of weal or woe. Millions of men must be taught the A, B, C of 
international cooperation for the common good. And they must dis- 
cover that the welfare, security, justice, liberty and honor of each is 
inseparable in the long run from that of all. 


Systematic education for peace should begin in the primary schools. 
All history text-books need careful revision. Essential to our world- 
peace program are scientific and impartial accounts of national con- 
flicts and international relations. The great cultural achievements 
and great leaders of each people should be described, for children— 
and adults also—love heroes. Even war heroes should be honored, 
but in ways that recognize the merits of heroes of other lands also, 
even of enemies. Thus may the spirit of fair play and appreciation 
be cultivated. The processes by which justice and peace, liberty and 
honor have been progressively secured within ever widening areas 
should be explained and stressed. The vital necessity for impartial 
law, courts and police should be made clear. For world peace can 
come only when great nations are ready to live as members of the world 


Mego Gee: 


community under a common law, abandoning their hitherto unquestioned 
right to be their own plaintiff, jury, judge and executioner in matters 
of international concern. 


A Cooperative Task 


Since wars spring from rivalry between nations, peace can come only 
by cooperation for peace in all matters that threaten to disrupt harmon- 
ious relations. 

To be specific, methods for intérnational cooperation should be devised 
in matters of trade, in the fair distribution of food and raw materials 
for industries and especially in the maintenance of security and justice 
for each by the united thought, purpose and power of all. This inevit- 
ably leads to some kind of a League or Association of Nations. 

Might not the governments establish departments with suitable staffs 
and susbtantial budgets for the sole purpose of finding and promoting 
methods of international cooperation? Should not governments pro- 
mote popular education on international good will? If it is legitimate 
for governments to maintain expensive establishments for security by 
means of armies and navies, why should it not be suitable for them 
to maintain parallel departments for security by means of activities 
creating good will and understanding between the nations? Efficiently 
carried out with budgets, small in proportion to budgets for military 
and naval preparedness, permanent peace for all the world could in 
time be assured. “Peace preparedness” would ultimately render “war- 
preparedness” unnecessary.* 


A Moral and a Religious Task 


Finally the establishment of permanent world peace is fundamentally 
also a moral and religious undertaking. Conceptions of duty and of 
religion must be enlarged. Whole nations must learn that moral prin- 
ciples effective in times of peace are universal and absolute and apply to 
states as well as to individuals. To steal, to lie, to deceive, to let loose 
the passions of lust and wrath and revenge, are never right. God is 
God for all and Father of all. He has no pet race. He has no private 
interest in one people more than in another. It is folly to petition him 
to be on “our side.” If we are Christians, if we believe in the God whom 
Jesus trusted and obeyed, we must believe that God hates all injustice, 
all oppression, all selfishness, all greed, all deceit. God loves all men, 
all nations and all races. 

This moral and religious education of the nations is the unique and 

*The suggestion of this paragraph has been repeatedly advanced by American writers 
and speakers in various forms during recent years. The essay by Dr. David Starr Jordan 
contributed to the American Peace Award and published in the volume, ‘‘Ways to Peace,” 
giving twenty of these essays, lays special stress on this proposal. In more concrete form 
it suggests that just as every government has a department devoted exclusively to the 
maintenance of security through preparations for war; and a department of foreign affairs 
for the negotiation of treaties and the constant scrutiny of all international relations from 
the standpoint of national policy; so there should be a department or bureau exclusively 
devoted to the promotion of international goodwill, justice and peace; the department might 


be made coordinate with the other departments of governments, or it might be made a 
section of the Department of State, the secretary in this case being under-secretary. 


aoe pe 


distinctive task for the churches in the Crusade for universal peace. 
If they fail, civilization fails and destruction will come down upon the 
whole world. Where the spirit of essential good will and of mutual con- 
fidence exists, every dispute can be settled. It is for the churches 
therefore to teach the peoples this right spirit. Without it no effec- 
tive international machinery can either be established or made to func- 
tion in times of stress and storm. 


PART V 
The Distinctive Function of the Churches 


The churches cannot of course take the place of the states. Pastors 
cannot substitute for statesmen in the dealings of nations and gov- 
ernments. While statesmen must draft the treaties, conduct the con- 
ferences and determine the legal relations and procedures of the nations, 
the distinctive field for preachers and pastors is to cultivate among the 
people the spirit of fair play, the desire for right and truth, and the 
will to brotherhood. For, as has been repeatedly stated, at the very 
foundation of any effective peace movement are the inescapable prin- 
ciples of the Golden Rule and the Good Samaritan. These must be 
widely held as ruling convictions before they can be applied to inter- 
national affairs. 

These principles and this spirit, however, cannot be cultivated in 
the abstract, in a vacuum—as mere ideals. Pastors and preachers must 
know the concrete situations, the difficult questions of daily contacts. 
It is their high office to proclaim the law of God, the categorical im- 
perative for nations as well as for individuals. 

It is theirs to bridge the chasms of feeling created by international 
politics or trade. It is theirs to banish misunderstanding and to create 
right understanding. It is theirs to conquer the hatreds and banish 
the suspicions that lead to war; to still the passions of national selfish- 
ness and greed. It is theirs to lead their peoples into clear under- 
standing of the causes of war and into fixed desire and determined will 
to walk as nations in the ways of righteousness and justice. It is 
theirs to teach the nations that practice of the Golden Rule in interna- 
tional life can alone bring in the Golden Age; that nations as well as 
individuals can and should overcome evil with good; that the strong 
should bear the burdens of the weak and so fulfil the law of Christ. 

In a word, it is theirs to show how the world war-system of the 
nations violates God’s purposes for the human family; that wrong and 
evil of every kind result from war and that fundamental and righteous 
solutions of difficulties between nations and races are seldom secured 
by war. 

Christian leaders may well picture the pitiful sufferings of those who 
fight and die; the horrible shambles into which the boys are hurled; 
the still more pitiful plight of millions of innocent women and children 
and the essential futility of it all. 


—16— 


The churches can lead their members to unalterable opposition to 
every act of their own governments inconsistent with Christian ideals 
and Christian principles. They can become centers of accurate inter- 
national knowledge, centers of courageous opposition to the war spirit 
and the war mind. 

While the churches, therefore, should not seek to take the place of 
the State, nor pastors attempt to dictate to statesmen the details of 
policies or the terms of treaties, they can rightly demand of the State 
the observance of moral principles. The churches in every nation can 
properly request their statesmen to devise procedures, enact laws and 
adopt treaties that look to international cooperation for the common 
good in place of self-seeking, nationalistic ambitions, and that substi- 
tute law for war in the settlement of international disputes. The 
churches may properly lead in the advocacy of specific constructive 
propositions for international cooperation. 

In democratic countries the churches can inspire their individual 
members to express in their votes their convictions regarding war and 
peace, electing men to positions of trust who will fight the moral battles 
for peace and guide their respective governments into Christian rela- 
tions with other nations. 

The Christian program for world peace must be sane and sober, prac- 
tical and concrete. Crying for the moon, however insistent and enthus- 
iastic, will always be futile and may be disastrous. The goals which 
the churches set before the people should be intrinsically achievable. 

Finally the churches must learn to work together in this great crusade. 
Sporadic actions by one group and then another for this objective and 
then for that,—however good in themselves—will accomplish little. 
“Like a mighty army” is the clue and the watchword. Each 
church must be so much in earnest that it will devote money and men 
to the task. The church never accomplishes anything worth while in 
any line until it supports men and provides budgets for the cause. 

The churches must develop trained men. They need experts. These 
will be their leaders. And these experts, representing the churches in 
each land, must get together and work together, steadily, patiently, 
determinedly, until they have fashioned and drilled a mighy host of 
Christian men and women who have the will to establish the King- 
dom of God in the relations of nations. 


SOME CONCLUSIONS 


1. The ideal of the Kingdom of God is universal. It includes every 
relation of human life. Individuals, communities, society, classes, na- 
tions, races,—all come within its scope. And the great spiritual agency 
for realizing this ideal is the Church of the living God. To it has been 
eutrusted the divine revelation of God’s redemptive purposes for the 
human race, incarnated in His Son Jesus Christ, and renewed in vital- 
izing power, generation after generation, through the Holy Spirit. 


Ds gre 


This ideal of the Kingdom of God includes banishment of wrong 
and wickedness, sorrow, suffering, wretchedness and poverty and the 
achievement of righteousness and justice, mercy, joy and peace for all 
mankind. 


2. The achievement of a Christian world-order rests primarily on 
the churches. This is a heavy responsibility. Failure spells the doom 
of Christian civilization, the destruction of the white nations in fratrici- 
dal strife. The churches of Christendom can end war if they will. 
To reach this goal they must be practical and concrete; and they must 
be inspired by holy and invincible enthusiasm. The war to end war 
must be a crusade—a crusade to banish pagan ideals, the pagan spirit 
and pagan policies. It must be guided by sanity, knowledge and prac- 
tical common sense. 


3. Christians by the million should be brought face to face with 
the personal question of the Christian attitude towards the war-system ° 
of the nations and the war-method of solving international and inter- 
racial disputes. Are they Christian? What is the method taught by 
Jesus for dealing with difficulties? In what spirit would Jesus seek to 
solve disputes? Each Christian must decide his own duty as a con- 
scientious follower of Jesus. 


4. Christian leaders in every land should set themselves with utmost 
zeal to cultivate among their own people the spirit of forgiveness and 
reconciliation with recent enemies and ancient foes. The hatreds and 
animosities due to past wrongs should be wiped out. Each people 
should learn to see its own wrong-doings. In this world of strife, 
none are innocent. All are guilty. All need both to forgive and to 
be forgiven. The reconciliation of the races is an essential factor in 
of Christian program for a warless world. 


5. Christian nations must cultivate the right spirit and true friend- 
liness toward the potentially mighty races of Asia and Africa. The 
achievement of a warless world depends on brotherly treatment ac- 
corded those races by the white nations of Europe. 


6. The churches in each land should establish a committee or cab- 
inet or General Staff for Peace. It should officially represent the entire 
Church body and be composed of the ablest leaders prepared to give 
adequate time to this vital ask. For none more vital or more impera- 
tive faces the churches and the world. This General Staff for Peace 
should scrutinize and judge the policies and actions of their respective 
governments from the standpoint of Christian ideals and principles. 
The government of each land should clearly understand that the 
churches are no longer bound to the chariot wheels of the State; that 
Christians have a loyalty to Christ that is superior to every human 
loyalty; and that as Christians and as churches they reserve to them 
selves the right to independent, moral judgment upon the international 
actions and policies of governments. 


et yee 


7. No more important and patriotic service can the churches render 
their respective nations and governments than by maintaining inde- 
pendence of judgment regarding international policies and undertakings, 
The governments should be cordially supported in every right endeavor 
and especially in resistance to the efforts of those who would utilize 
the military and diplomatic powers of governments for selfish, capital- 
istic or narrow nationalistic ambitions. Never again should the 
churches endorse and support a war concerning the causes, obligations 
and purposes of which they do, not have complete information. Never 
again should they innocently and ignorantly yield themselves and their 
sacred authority to further the aims of governments dominated by 
secret, selfish policies and by pagan principles and objectives. The 
deceptions practiced by the governments during the late war in pub- 
lishing “censored” information and in omitting from their official Blue 
Books and Yellow Books essential facts, thus securing a moral support 
from the people otherwise impossible, should be a lesson never to be 
forgotten. 


8. Only when the churches persuade the nations to come to the 
House of God ready to listen to His Law and to walk in His paths, 
will come the dawn of a new day for the children of men. And it may 
be nearer than we think—if only a few determined, clear minded, in- 
spired and gifted leaders shall arise in each church and each nation, 
called of God and endowed for this task. If the churches want them 
and call for them God will send them. The demand of the peoples of 
every land is for peace, universal and permanent. But the masses are 
dumb and blind. They do not see the way. They cannot speak their 
mind. They are groping for the goal. But they cannot reach it with- 
out intelligent, wise and conscientious leadership. 


The central and final problem is the problem of Christian leaders. 


Li; 
ITI. 


IV. 


Vi, 
VII. 


VIII. 


APPENDICES 


INTERNATIONAL IDEALS 
OF THE CHURCHES OF CHRIST IN AMERICA 


Adopted by 


The Executive Committee of the Federal Council of the — 
Churches of Christ in America, December, 1921 
The majority of the Constituent Bodies of the 

Federal Council during 1922, 1923 and 1924 
The Fifth Quadrennial Meeting of the 
Federal Council, December 1924 


We believe that nations no less than individuals are subject to God’s 
immutable moral laws. 


We believe that nations achieve true welfare, greatness and honor only 
through just dealing and unselfish service. 


We believe that nations that regard themselves as Christian have special 
international obligations. 


We believe that the spirit of Christian brotherliness can remove every 
unjust barrier of trade, color, creed and race. 


We believe that Christian patriotism demands the practice of good-will 
between nations. 


We believe that international policies should secure equal justice for all 
races. 


We believe that all nations should associate themselves permanently for 
world peace and good-will. 


We believe in international law, and in the universal use of international 
courts of justice and boards of arbitration. 


We believe in a sweeping reduction of armaments by all nations. 


We believe in a warless world, and dedicate ourselves to its achievement. 


XIII 


A MESSAGE TO THE CHURCHES OF CHRIST IN AMERICA FROM 
THE FEDERAL COUNCIL’S COMMISSION ON INTER- 
NATIONAL JUSTICE AND GOODWILL 


(March, 1924) 


The war-system of the nations is the outstanding evil of present-day civiliza- 
tion. It is the most ominous anti-Christian phase of modern life. The nations 
are constructing more and more effective devices for wholesale destruction. 
Should another world war overtake us, helpless men, women and children by the 
million, in cities great and small, would be suffocated, poisened, burned to death. 


eS Qik ae Sea ae a 


The followers of Christ throughout our land should now concentrate on the 
stupendous and imperative task of outlawing war and banishing it from the world. 
The Churches, as Churches, should grapple with this monstrous foe. Let them 
denounce the colossal wrongs and evils of war, and point out the violation of 
every moral principle and ideal by the methods of war. Let them call the peoples 
to repentance for their long acquiescence in the war-system of the nations. Let 
them cultivate the right mind and the right will, which alone can make permanent 


peace a reality. 
eS ee Be Cte 


This is a task for the Churches of all the nations; for world peace can come 
only by the common action of all the nations. But the Churches of America 
have a unique opportunity and responsibility—to influence our nation to take the 
lead in outlawing war and to inspire our government to take its appropriate part 
in the councils of the nations for the establishment of a new international order. 


* * * * * 


Should not the Churches, affirming that their loyalty to Christ transcends all 
lower loyalties and determined to apply the principles and the spirit of Christ 
to every national and international problem, stand on their own feet, do their own 
thinking, adopt their own policies, and assert their independent right to deal with 
the greatest moral evil of this generation? Let them refuse unequivocally to sup- 
port pagan international policies or acquiesce in colossal and provocative prepara- 
tions for super-pagan wars. Let them declare that, for nations no less than for 
individuals, the wages of sin is death and that evil is to be overcome with good. 


* % * * * 


The time has surely come for the Churches, as Churches, local as well as 
national, to organjze and mobilize for constructive programs in the crusade to 
establish world peace Pastors should steadily hold these matters before their 
congregations. Women’s organizations, young people’s societies, Sunday Schools 
and groups of every kind should give themselves with utmost zeal to this crusade. 
All our Churches should become centers of accurate information on the bearing 
of Christian principles on international problems, centers of constructive programs 
for international righteousness and organized goodwill, centers of courageous 
anatagonism to the war-spirit and the war-system, placing loyalty to Christ and 
His Will above local prejudice, class jealousy, race hatred, partisan politics and 
narrow nationalism : 

This call is an appeal for practical action. Not they who say, “Lord, Lord” 
shall be saved, but they who DO the Will of the Heavenly Father. 


* * * * * 


Christian citizens have the right and the duty to inquire of those who repre- 
sent them concerning their ideas and purposes regarding the outlawry of war, 
the substitution of law for war, and the embodiment in appropriate legislation 
of the ethical principles of the Kingdom of God in the relations of nations. 


* * * as * 


_ The war-system of the nations will be overthrown and a peace system estab- 
lished only when millions of men and women take vital interest in these ques- 
tions, place them above party politics, and express their convictions in their votes. 


XIV 


THE 1925 PROGRAM 
OF THE 


FEDERAL COUNCIL OF THE CHURCHES OF CHRIST 
IN AMERICA 


Adopted at Atlanta, Ga. 
December 8, 1924 


The Responsibility of the Churches 


The Church of Jesus Christ throughout the world has the responsibility for 
moulding the minds and wills of nations, no less than of individuals, to do 
justly, to love mercy and to walk humbly with God. 


Christians of all lands and all churches should seek with utmost determina- 
tion to reconcile the nations, to eradicate their misunderstandings, prejudices, 
hatreds, fears and suspicions, and to create among them the spirit of unity and 
the noble purpose to work for the common good. 


Ideals and Realization 


Realization of the ideals and principles of the Prince of Peace would mean 
the abolition of war and of all preparation for war. This would involve the 
acceptance of the spirit and the establishment of the agencies of justice, fair 
dealing and goodwill between nations. It would require the friendly cooperation 
of all nations in the creation and maintenance of international law, in the 
determination to settle every threatening international dispute by judicial 
process or by proceedings of arbitration or conciliation, and in provisions for 
security, honor and economic opportunity for all alike, both great and small. 
For permanent world peace can come only from justice, justice from impartial 
law and impartial law only from orderly society, organized on the principles 
of universal goodwill revealed to us in Jesus Christ 


For the achievement of these sublime ends, under the guidance and blessing 
of God Almighty, we commend to the Churches of America the following con- 
crete suggestions: 


The World Court 


Let the Churches of America continue their campaign for adherence by the 
United States to the Protocol of the Permanent Court of International Justice, 
under the terms stated by the late President Harding and urged by President 
Coolidge. 


This World Court of Justice is not only the fruition and consummation of 
many decades of American discussions, plans and desires for international 
peace through justice based on law, but also the promise of a larger and 
truer righteousness and justice among the nations, a step forward in the establish- 
ment of the Kingdom of God among men. This Court will, we believe, 
promote the development of a well-considered body of international law and 
the substitution of reason, justice and goodwill in place of the crude and 
savage methods of war or threats of war in settling international disputes 
and in maintaining legitimate and vital national interests. 


International Law 


Let the Christians of America steadily insist that the United States should 
actively cooperate with the nations of the world in codifying existing inter- 
national law and in drafting and enacting new law to cover situations not 
covered by existing law. The United States should be among the first of 
the great nations on a reciprocal basis to accept the principles and the pledge 
to submit to suitable international tribunals for settlement every threatening 
dispute, whatsoever its nature may be. 


XV 


The Outlawing of War 


Let the Christians and Churches of America support with vigor the move- 
ment for the outlawing of war. America should heartily cooperate in the 
complete repudiation of aggressive war as a legitimate method for settling 
international disputes, remembering that where there is no aggression there 
will be no need for defense. 


Aggressive war should be branded as an international crime and an aggressor 
nation regarded as having committed a crime among the nations. Adequate 
and impartial agencies should speedily be established for determining the 
aggressor in specific cases and for bringing to bear upon such a nation the 
combined moral condemnation of the world. 


Universal Disarmament 


Let American Christians support with united hearts and voices the call of 
all peoples for the drastic reduction of armaments of every kind. 


Armaments not only cost colossal sums wrung from impoverished peoples, 
block industry, hinder. production, consume capital, doom millions to helpless 
poverty, and cripple all movements for the common good; but they also foster 
international suspicion, fears and hatreds, in ever widening circles of vicious 
influence. They help create the militaristic mind among their own people 
and also among suspecting neighbors. 


The time has come for nations to prepare and carry out together vast and 
continuing programs for reduction of armament, in conjunction with pledges 
for the pacific settlement of every threatening international dispute and with 
adequate guarantees of security and of maintenance of honor for the nations 
that give themselves to the program for peace. 


For disarmament must be mutual; it is impossible without security and 
security depends upon adequate and enduring institutions and agencies for 
peace. 


American Christians should exert every influence to secure the issuance or 
the acceptance by the United States Government of an invitation to attend a 
World Disarmament Conference. We believe that our own Government should 
show its readiness for such a step by taking the leadership in the program 
for disarmament. 


Cooperation With Other Nations 


Let us as Christian citizens earnestly advocate the full cooperation of the 
United States with other nations in efficient international organization for the 
pacific settlement of every international dispute, for the outlawing of war and 
for a program of thorough-going disarmament for all, in which organization 
all nations may take their full share in establishing world justice, in bearing 
world burdens and in maintaining world peace. 


In accordance with expressions, offical and otherwise, already made by the 
Constituent Bodies of the Federal Council, we advocate full, open and friendly 
relations between the United States and the League of Nations, without com- 
mitments which would involve us in the local politics of European or of 
other nations. 


We believe that with proper reservations and a clear statement of America’s 
principles and international policies the United States might and should take 
her place at the side of all the nations cooperating in the League and could 
render important service in solving difficult international problems and in pro- 
moting world justice and understanding, world goodwill and peace. 


Reestablishing Right-Relations With Japan 


Let American Christians study with utmost care the situation of strain re- 
cently created between America and Japan by the action of Congress in abruptly. 
annulling the Gentlemen’s Agreement with Japan and in refusing “even to 


XVI 


consider Japan’s courteous offer to adjust the matter on any terms within 
the bounds of reason and honor. Congress committed an act in flagrant dis- 
regard of the customary amenities and procedures of international relations. 


Let us seek a fundamental solution of our relations with Japan which, while 
completely protecting the Pacific Coast States from all ‘dangers of Asiatic 
immigration, shall be thoroughly courteous and free from humiliating race 
discrimination. The issue is not “closed.” Some friendly adjustment must 
be found. " 


The Forward Move of the Churches 


The Federal Council records its deep satisfaction in receiving the stirring 
declarations and utterances of many of its constituent bodies, calling for the 
establishment of a Christian world order and for the complete abolition of 
war as a recognized and legitimate method of settling disputes between nations. 


It rejoices that for the achievement of these high ends fifteen denominations 
have established Commissions, Committees or Departments on International 
Goodwill to carry forward constructive educational programs within their own 
membership and to cooperate with one another in the common effort to render 
more effective the Christian ideal of a warless world. 


Rejoicing in what has been done, the Federal Council expresses its convic- 
tion that, for the full achievement of our ideal, every national, state and city 
religious body should have an appropriate and effective agency to deal with 
this question, and in close cooperation with the Federal Council’s Commission 
actually to carry out the essential educational programs. Denominations, 
pastors, congregations and church members should be urged to realize the 
weight of the responsibility resting upon them for the abolition of war and 
its complete banishment from the earth 

The Federal Council earnestly suggests to all colleges, theological schbols 
and seminaries the importance of providing for their students effective 
courses on international questions and especially on the fundamental moral 
principles which must be generally accepted by nations before war and pre- 
parations for war will cease. It urges the introduction of lessons on these 
issues in Sunday Schools and in study groups and classes within or affiliated 
with the Churches. 


The Need for Prayer 


In seeking these high objectives of world justice, brotherhood and peace, 
the Federal Council calls upon ail Christian people in every church and every 
home to pray as a people for forgiveness for our long apathy to the continuance 
of the war-system; forgiveness for our blindness to the utterly un-Christian 
character of war; forgiveness for our national selfishness, for our lack of love 
to enemies, for our self-satisfaction and self-righteousness, for our race-pride 
and arrogance. 


Let us pray for fresh enlightenment of our minds, that we may see clearly 
where the pathway lies, for a new spirit of devotion to Jesus Christ, our Lord, 
for a new desire and a fixed will to do His will in our international relations. 
Let us educate our youth and our children to have faith in the possibility of 
achieving a Christian international life and of finding constructive methods 
for its realization. 


The Summons to Self-Dedication 


To these sublime purposes we summon the Christians and Churches of America, 
Let us seek to know and do the mind and the will of Christ, assured that 
these principles and ideals of His are rooted in the eternal and unchangeable 
character of God, the fountain of all justice and law, the infinite source of 
reason and love. Let us dedicate ourselves afresh to the accomplishment of 
pore high ends, seeking therein the guidance and blessing of the Prince of 

eace. 


XVII 


Excerpts from 


DECLARATIONS and RESOLUTIONS 
ADOPTED BY NATIONAL CHURCH BODIES 


Methodist Episcopal (May, 1924) 


Millions of our fellow men have died heroically in “a war to end war.” What 
they undertook must be finished by methods of peace. War is not inevitable. 
It is the supreme enemy of mankind. Its futility is beyond question. Its 
continuance is the suicide of civilization. We are determined to outlaw the 
whole war system. : 

The patriotism of the Methodist Episcopal Church has never been challenged. 
Neither our motives nor our loyalty must be impugned when we insist on the 
fulfillment of pledges made to the dead and assert our Christian ideals for 
the living. Governments which ignore the Christian conscience of men in 
time of peace can not justly claim the lives of men in time of war. Secret 
diplomacy and political partisanship must not draw men into the dilemma of 
deciding between support of country and loyalty to Christ. 

The world is now open to a crusade for peace. War-weary nations every- 
where are eagerly waiting. America should lead the way. The Nation and 
the Church can do now what they may never, never be able to do again. 

We set ourselves to create the will to peace. We recommend that a prayer 
for peace be prepared and used at every communion service. Through its 
educational program, our Church must do its full share to mould the present 
youth of all races into a peace-loving generation. We shall launch an ag- 
gressive campaign to teach the nature, causes and consequences of war. The 
glorification of war must end. 

We set ourselves to create the donditions for peace. Selfish nationalism, 
economic imperialism and militarism must cease. We demand the establish- 
ment of the principle that conscription of wealth and labor must be the counter- 
part of any future conscription of human life. As great odium must be put 
upon the war profiteer as is put upon the slacker. The protection of special 
privileges secured by investors in foreign lands has too often imperiled the 
peace of nations. This source of danger must be prevented. The rights of 
the smallest nation must be held as sacred as those of the strongest. 

We hold the cause of peace dearer than party allegiance and we shall tolerate 
no dilatory or evasive attitudes on the part of those who represent us. 

We set ourselves to create organization for peace. Grateful to our Govern- 
ment for leadership in the movement toward reduction of armaments and 
the promotion of tribunals for international arbitration, we insist upon a 
still more decided and aggressive policy in these directions. We urge the 
President of the United States to summon another Conference of the Nations 
for the more drastic reduction of armaments. We likewise urge upon the 
Senate the immediate entrance of the United States into the Permanent Court 
of International Justice. The participation of the United States in a League 
of Nations will receive our active aid. 

We call upon all our people to support for public office men pledged to 
secure these ends. The ballot and other direct processes of democracy must 
now be employed in securing a warless world. 

World Christianity is enlisting in the campaign for peace. We seek alliance 
with all the forces which make for the principles here advocated. We, there- 
fore, propose that our Church now assume its full share of responsibility by 
appointing at this General Conference a commission of twenty-five members, 
composed of five bishops, ten ministers, and ten laymen authorized and in- 
structed to invite the religious forces of the world to unite in a conference to 
consider the best plans and methods for making the impact of a world-wide 
religious sentiment against the evils we deplore. 

The principles of brotherhood are plainly challenged. The progress of the 
Kingdom of Jesus Christ is clearly at stake. The issues are so momentous, 
the opportunity for leadership is so great, that we here and now call upon all 
people to avoid divisive and fruitless discussions and unite their energies in 
this great movement for a war-free world. To this sublime end we dedicate - 
ourselves, and for its accomplishment we invoke the blessing of Almighty God. 


XVIII 


Baptist (North) (June, 1924) 


Whereas, the Christian conscience of the world is coming to recognize that 
war is neither inevitable nor necessary, that it is contrary to the spirit and teach- 
ing of Jesus Christ; that it is the most colossal and ruinous social sin that afflicts 
humanity today; that under modern conditions war has now become not only 
futile but suicidal; and that the recognition of this fact is necessary to the 
continuance of civilization; therefore be it : 

Resolved, that the Northern Baptist Convention again declares its conviction 
that war is a wrong method for settling international disputes, and that, because 
it is wrong, the church must not only condemn war, and the things that make 
for war, but also take an active part in discovering and promoting the things 
which make for peace; and be it further 

Resolved, that the Northern Baptist Convention desires to join with other 
religious bodies in calling a world conference to consider what can be done to 
promote more friendly relations among nations and to create a world conscience 
against war and so to bring the power of a United Christendom to bear against 
the continuance of the war system; and be it further 

Resolved, that we request our pastors and people to set themselves afresh to 
the task of creating a love of justice and a will for peace, and thus achieve the 
utter repudiation of war by the Christian conscience and its outlawry by the gov- 
ernments of the world. 


Protestant Episcopal (September, 1922) 


There is one way and one way only to outlaw war. We must first establish 
a peace system. Mere disarmament by itself will not stop war. Only the firm 
establishment of the institutions and agencies of justice and of liberty under law, 
maintained by effective sanctions at the hands of law-abiding and peace loving 
nations, can possibly banish war from this war-cursed world. The most urgent 
need of mankind is the speedy establishment of international institutions to 
assure equal justice, full security and fair economic opportunity for all nations 
alike. These are essential pre-requisites to permanent peace. 

* x * 


We solemnly commit ourselves as members of a Christian Church to use 
every consistent means to the end that war may be abolished and that the 
Golden Rule may become the universal law of nations and peoples. 


(November, 1923) 


The Church cannot permit war to remain the only method for the ultimate 
settlement of disputes between nations. We are therefore of the conviction that 
it is the immediate and imperative duty of the United States Government either 
to join the existing League of Nations, or to proceed immediately to organize 
some other effective Association or Council of Nations for the pupose of settling 
amicably international disputes, and thus save us from the great danger of an- 
other World War. 


Congregational (October, 1923) 


Believing that war as a method of settling international disputes or achiev- 
ing national aspirations is both unnecessary and anti-Christian, the Council 
reaffirms its faith that Christ’s way of thought and life is sufficient to overcome 
the causes of war, and lead the nations into a life of co-operative peace. The 
Council also believes that there is a special obligation upon the Church of Christ 
ta organize and prepare for peace, to engage at once with all its power in a 
campaign of education against war as a method and in favor of other methods 
of settling disputes, to diminish among peoples the disposition to resort to force, 
to bring the people to the conviction that war is wrong, and to develop the will 


for peace. 
> *« *& & 


The Council recommends to the churches that there be systematically and 
concretely presented, from the pulpit, in the church schools, and in special 
study classes, ideals and methods of international goodwill and co-operation, 


XIX 


... It is the sense of the National Council of Congregational Churches that 
our Nation should rise above all political partisanship in its international rela- 
tions; and that the world situation demands that America proceed at once to 
enter the World Court. ... 

We believe that the United States should either enter into the existing League 
of Nations, or find some more effective way to take our part in bearing the 
burdens of the world, solving its desperate problems and promoting peace 
among men. 


Presbyterian (U. S. A.) (June, 1924) 


The Presbyterian Church in the U. S. A. pledges all its energies to the out- 
lawing of war and to the hastening of the day when nations shall learn war no 
more. We refuse to believe that the wholesale slaughter of human beings upon 
the battlefield is morally any more necessary to man’s highest development than is 
killing individuals. We see in war’s cruelties, made more terrible by modern 
invention, not only a menace to civilization but also a definte challenge to the 
followers of the Prince of Peace. 

We invite the co-operation of all Christendom in a determined effort to devise 
such complete machinery for peace as shall insure the settlement of all inter- 
national controversies by reason instead of force. 

To this end we favor participation by our nation with other nations in the 
Court of International Justice, and the submission for judicial settlement, or the 
arbitration, of disputes, and the investigation, before a resort to arms, of all 
differences which cannot be adjudicated or arbitrated, reserving the right to 
control our own destiny and to determine whether or not and when we shall 
declare war. 


Reformed Presbyterian Church (June, 1924) 


Whereas war is essentially and inherently a supreme violation of the teach- 
ings and spirit of Jesus; and whereas it is ineffective as a means for building 
the Kingdom of God and is in its very nature self-defeating; and, whereas it has 
been amply demonstrated that preparedness for war is no guarantee for national 
security; and, whereas war as a method for securing national ends, however just 
and right, is anti-Christian; be it resolved: 

I. That the Reformed Presbyterian Church in Synod assembled requests the 
government of the United States to take immediate steps toward the outlawing 
of war as a legal and justifiable method of settling international disputes. 

II. That this Synod insist on the substitution of law and the processess of law 
for violence in the settlement of such disputes, and to that end, that the Senate 
and Cabinet be urged to take the steps necessary to make this country a member 
of the Permanent Court of International Justice and of the League of Nations. 


United Presbyterian (June, 1924) 


While we positively disown sympathy with any effort of anti-war propa- 
gandists which tends to encourage or promote disloyalty or dim the lustre of 
national spirit and patriotism, we nevertheless, as a Church, declare our opposi- 
tion to war and refuse to bless, condone, or support it in any way except it be in 
justifiable self-defense or as a clear necessity for the deliverance of an oppressed 
people or nation. 

We believe that universal and permanent peace is possible only by the Prince 
of Peace that the regeneration of the hearts of men through the gospel of 
Jesus Christ is the final solution of the problem of war. 


Methodist Protestant Church (May, 1924) 


“We hold it to be a national sin to resort to war until every possible peaceful 
agency has been employed; and that no nation is ever justified in a war of 


aggression. 
Lipid, Pe Wes | 


We favor participation by our nation with other nations in the Court of In- 
ternational Justice, ‘and the submission for judicial settlement of all disputes; and - 
the investigation before resort to arms of all differences which cannot be adjudi- 


XX 


cated or arbitrated, reserving unto ourselves the right to determine whether or 
not, and when we shall declare war. We pledge all our energies to the outlawing 
of war, and to the hastening of the day when the slaughter of human beings upon 
the battlefield is forever ended. 


Friends’ General Conference (July, 1924) 


We believe the whole system of determining right by violence and destruction 
rather than by friendly conference and negotiations is fundamentally wrong, in- 
efficient and irreligious. We oppose as a religious body all participation in war, 
and believe that no more patriotic service in any nation can be rendered than to 
save that nation and others from war. We urge all people to support such inter- 
national organizations as will insure peaceful methods of dealing with differences 
between nations. 


Unitarian (South) (April 29, 1924) 


Resolved that we renew our allegiance to the things which make for peace, 
and by teaching and example, in our worship and our daily conduct, dedicate 
ourselves to the principles of our religion, so that barriers may be broken down 
among the nations, mutual understanding be increased, the unity of our common 
humanity deepened, and the governments of the world inspired to advance our 
civilization by the spiritual forces of truth, integrity and service. 


Unitarian (North) (May, 1924) 


Now, therefore, we urge all of our churches and their members to use their 
influence toward the development of more civilized and friendly international 
relations whereby all world problems may be solved by peaceful means and to 
the end that warfare may be abolished from the earth. 


Universalist General Convention (October, 1923) 


Whereas, war is a denial of the basic principles of the Fatherhood of God 
and the Brotherhood of Man and is the cause of terrific destruction of both 
material land spiritual values and has reached such a stage of development that 
it threatens the existence of civilization. ' 

Therefore, Be It Resolved, that this Convention place itself unequivocally 
on the side of every effort towards causing war to be recognized as a crime in 
international law and a violation of the Christian religion. 


Central Conference of American Rabbis (June, 1924) 


We urge upon our fellow-citizens and upon those who guide the destinies of 
our land that, being true to themselves, they adopt an uncompromising opposi- 
tion to war. We believe that war is morally indefensible. War that crushes 
the young, that prutalizes and degrades, that destroys all that is most precious. 
must not be honored and glorified. It must be recognized for what it is and 
this must be taught to our children... . 


We do not champion extreme attitudes. We do not adhere to the doctrine 
of non-resistance. We believe that there have been righteous wars. Freedom 


and justice are worth more than life. A nation must defend its moral integrity, 
its existence. 


XXI 


BIBLIOGRAPHY 


A. The Christian’s Attitude Toward War 


“What Makes a Nation Great?” (120 pp.), Frederick Lynch, 1914. 

“Christ or Napoleon” (96 pp.), Peter Ainslie, 1915. 

“Christ or Mars?” (1923). Will Irwin. 

“The Higher Patriotism” (72 pp.), John Grier Hibben, 1915. 

“Ts Christianity Practicable?” (240 pp.), Wm, Adams Brown, 1916. 

“The World and the Gospel” (222 pp.), J. H. Oldham, 1916. 

“What the War Is Teaching” (218 pp.), Chas. E. Jefferson, 19s ee 

“The Challenge of the Present Crisis” (99 pp.), Harry Emerson Fosdick, 
1917. 

“The Christian Man, the Church and the War” (105 pp.), Robert E. 

Speer, 1918. 

“Religion and War” (188 pp.), W. H. P. Faunce, 1918. 

“The Missionary Outlook in the Light of the War” (330 pp.), Committee 
on the War and the Religious Outlook, 1920. 

“Christ and International Life” (150 pp.), Edith Picton-Turbervill, 1922. 

“The Sword or the Cross” (61 pp.), Kirby Page, 1922. 

“The Christian Basis of World Democracy” (1919), K. S. Latourette. 

“War: Its Causes, Consequences and Cure” (1923), Kirby Page. 

The Christian Basis of World Democracy (1919): K. S. Latourette. 


B. Valuable Compilations and Quotations 


“Selected Quotations on Peace and War’ (540 pp.), Federal Council of 
the Churches of Christ in America, 1915. 

“The War and Religion’. A very complete catalogue of books, pamphlets 
and articles. Association Press (135 pp. 1919). 

Waves Peace” 1924, Twenty Selected Plans, and Preface by Edward 
WV. Bok 

“Mobilizing for Peace” (1924),Addresses delivered at the Annual Meeting 
af ie World Alliance for International Friendship, edited by Frederick 
ynch. 

“America’s Stake in the Far East” (165 pp.), Chas. H. Fahs, 1920. 

“America’s Stake in Europe” (186 pp.), Chas. H. Fahs, 1921. 

“Handbook on Disarmament” (320 pp.), Mary K. Reiley, 1921. 


C. The Causes, the Results and the Cure of War 


“The Great Illusion” (416 pp.), Norman Angell, 1913. 

“The War of Steel and Gold” (320 pp.), H. N. Brailsford, 1914. 

“The Stakes of Diplomacy” (235 pp.), Walter Lippman, 1915. 

Wrcee) Progress and the Darwinian Theory” (415 pp.), Geo. W. Nasmyth, 

“A Straight Deal or an Ancient Grudge” (287 pp.), Owen Wister, 1920. 

“Causes of International War” (110 pp.), G. Lowes Dickinson, 1920. 

“Direct and Indirect Costs of the War” (250 pp.), E. L. Bogart, 1920. 

“Now It Can Be Told” (400 pp.), Sir Philip Gibbs, 1920. 

“War: Its Nature, Cause and Cure (1923), G. Lowes Dickinson. 

“The A. B. C. of Disarmament” (122 pp.), Arthur Bullard, 1921. 

“The Folly of Nations” (405 pp.), Frederick Palmer, 1921. 

“The Fruits of Victory” (335 pp.), Norman Angell, 1921. 

“The Next War” (161 pp.), Will Irwin, 1921. 

“The Staggering Burden of Armament” (60 pp.), World Peace Founda- 
tion, 1921. 

“International Relations” (260 pp.), James Bryce, 1921. 

“Cross Currents in Europe Today” (250 pp.), Chas. A. Beard, 1922. 

“Introduction to the Study of International Organization” (647 pp.) P. 
P. Potter, 1922, 

“Public Opinion” (427 pp.) Walter Lippman, 1922. 

“The Prevention of War” (1923), Philip Kerr and Lionel Curtis. 

“War on War” (1923), Frederick J. Libby. 


XXII 


D. On International Co-operation 


“The Road to World Peace’ (370 pp.), Oscar Newfang, 1924. 

“Essay on a Congress of Nations (1840)” (161 pp.), Wm. Ladd, reprinted 
with an introduction by Dr. James Brown Scott, 1916. 

“The Federation of the World” (228 pp.), Benjamin F. Trueblood, 1899. 

“The Two Hague Conferences” (516 pp.), Prof. Wm. I. Hull, 1908. 

“Towards International Government” (212 pp.), J. A. Hobson, 1915. 

“The Great Solution” (169 pp.), Henri LaFontaine, 1916. 

“International Government” (410 pp.), L. S. Woolf, 1916. 

“A League of Nations,” 2 Vols. (137 pp. and 140 pp.), Theodore Marburg, 
1917 and 1918. 

“The League of Nations at Work” (215 pp.), Arthur Sweetser, 1920. 

“Entente Diplomacy and the World” (762 pp.), Siebert & Schreiner, 1921. 

“League of Nations Year Book” (440 pp.), Chas. H. Levermore, 1922. 

“The History and Nature of International Relations” (299 pp.), E. A. 
Walsh, 1922. 

“League or War” (1923), Irving Fisher. 

“Introduction to World Politics” 1922), Herbert Adams Gibbons. 


E. Far Eastern Problems 


The Far East as a Whole 


“The Occident and the Orient” (214 pp.), Sir Valentine Chirol, 1924. 

“The New Map of Asia” (525 pp.), H. A. Gibbons, 1921. 

“China, Japan and Korea” (325 pp.), J. O. P. Bland, 1921. 

“Problems of the Pacific and the Far East” (20 pp.), Sidney L. Gulick, 
1922. 

“The Rising Temper of the East” (247 pp.), Frazier Hunt, 1922. 

“Russia in the Far East” (181 pp.), L. Pasvolsky, 1922. 

“Asia at the Crossroads” (369 pp.), E. Alexander Powell, 1922. 


China 


“The Development of China” (290 pp.), K. S. Latourette, 1917. 

“Foreign Financial Control in China” (295 pp.), T. W. Overlack, 1919. 

“Foreign Rights and Interests in China” (594 pp.), Prof. W. W. Will- 
oughby, 1920. 

“China. Captive or Free” (310 pp.), Gilbert Reid, 1921. 

“China’s Place in the Sun” (212 pp.), Stanley High, 1922. 


Japan 


“The Development of Japan” (225 pp.), K. S. Latourette, 1918. 
“Japan and World Peace” (196 pp.), K. K. Kawakami, 1919. 

“Must We Fight Japan?” (536 pp.), W. B. Pitkin, 1921. 

“What Japan Thinks” (237 pp.), K. K. Kawakami, 1921. 

“What Japan Wants” (154 pp.), Y. S. Kuno, 1921. 

“What Shall I Think of Japan?” (285 pp.), George Gleason, 1921. 
“Japanese-American Relations” (207 pp.), Hon. lichiro Tokutomi, 1922. 


Korea 


“The Mastery of the Far East (Japan and Korea)” (670 pp.)3, Arthur 
J. Brown, 1919. 

“The Oriental Policy of the United States” (306 pp.), Henry Chung, 1919. 

“The Rebirth of Korea” (272 pp.), Hugh H. Cynn, 1920. 

“The Case of Korea” (365 pp.), Henry Chung, 1921. 


XXII 


The California Japanese Question 


“California and the Japanese” (231 pp.), California State Board of Control, 1920. 

“Immigration (Japanese)” (232) pp.), Annals, American Academy of 
Social and Political Science, Jan., 1921. 

“The American Japanese Problem” (339 pp.), Sidney L. Gulick, 1914. 

“American Democracy and Asiatic Citizenship” (257 pp.), Sidney L. 
Gulick, 1918. 

“Japan and the California Question” (250 pp.), T. Iyenaga, 1921. 

“The Real Japanese Question” (269.), K. K. Kawakami, 1921. 

“Should Congress Enact Special Laws Affecting Japanese?” (96 pp.), Sid- 
ney L. Gulick, 1922. : 


The Washington Conference and the Far East. 


Re ths the Far East Washington Conference” (95 pp.) Henry W. 

aft, 1921. 

“China at the Conference” (419 pp.), W. W. Willoughby, 1922. 

“Chinese-Japanese Conversations at Washington on the Shantung Ques- 
tion” (396 pp.), Official Minutes, 1922. 

“Japan’s Pacific Policy” (373 pp.), K. K. Kawakami, 1922. 


X XIV 








4} Aa 4 








eh fi RUNS ab ROD hh 
ent ai) Nn Ura tint ¥ a 
: aH reel ‘i se 
1 / om | 4 
— a 4 
4 
Printed in U. S. A. 
THE GOTHIC PRESS 
\ New York, N.Y. 
i 
vey 
igh 
we 1 f 


